How Public Health Research Translates into Policy and Practice
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Edinburgh
Department Name: Sch of Social and Political Science
Abstract
Abstracts are not currently available in GtR for all funded research. This is normally because the abstract was not required at the time of proposal submission, but may be because it included sensitive information such as personal details.
People |
ORCID iD |
| Katherine Smith (Principal Investigator / Fellow) |
Publications
BAULD L
(2012)
Benefits and Employment: How Problem Drug Users Experience Welfare and Routes into Work
in Journal of Social Policy
Katherine Smith (Author)
(2011)
Unpacking the (unintended?) impacts of evidence-based policy and the impact agenda
Katherine Smith (Author)
(2011)
Academic treadmills and the squeeze on intellectual spaces
Katherine Smith (Author)
(2011)
Health inequalities in Scotland and England : the translation of ideas between research and policy
Katherine Smith (Consultant)
(2011)
Plenary discussion
Smith K
(2012)
Capturing complex realities: understanding efforts to achieve evidence-based policy and practice in public health
in Evidence & Policy
Smith K
(2013)
Institutional filters: the translation and re-circulation of ideas about health inequalities within policy
in Policy & Politics
Smith K
(2012)
Fools, Facilitators and Flexians: Academic Identities in Marketised Environments Fools, Facilitators and Flexians
in Higher Education Quarterly
| Description | Ideas, rather than evidence, represent the appropriate unit of analysis in studies exploring the relationship between public health research and policy; It is important to study and understand how policy influences research (as well as the other way round); Research funders play a crucial, and under-explored, role in mediating the relationship between research and policy; Between 1997-2007, contrasting research-informed ideas about health inequalities experienced markedly different journeys into policy - whilst some ideas seem to achieve more influence than the research suggests they ought to have done, others have faltered (influencing rhetoric but not actions) or become fractured and re-interpreted as they travelled into policy contexts; The following four idea-types help explain the relationship between public health research and policy: (i) institutionalised ideas (embedded within organisations and/or discourses); (ii) critical ideas (which directly challenge, and focus on problematising, institutionalised ideas); (iii) charismatic ideas (which persuasive challenge institutionalised ideas through the creation of visions of alternative, future realities); and (iv) chameleonic ideas (the successful dissemination of which is dependent on metamorphic qualities which enable the idea to be interpreted in contrasting ways by different audiences). This ideational typology (informed by the theories of Max Weber and Bruno Latour) has broader public health relevance including for tobacco control, where the contrasting idea types help explain: (i) the long time-lag between the emergence of evidence about the harms caused by smoking and significant UK policy action to reduce those harms; and (ii) the flurry of policy activity in this area since 1997. There were three significant differences between the interviews undertaken for the PhD (in 2003-2006) and those undertaken during the Post-Doctoral Fellowship (2011-2012): (i) an increase in the levels of pessimism amongst policymakers and researchers about the prospects for reducing health inequalities in the UK (although there was rather more optimism in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK); (ii) a growing number of references to knowledge brokers, knowledge exchange and the research impact agenda (which were largely favourable); and (iii) an increase in the number of health inequalities researchers who identified themselves as public health advocates. The somewhat more optimistic perspective on health inequalities of interviewees based in Scotland appeared to be linked to a belied that policymakers in Scotland were more committed to state intervention to reduce health inequalities and to an equitable society. This requires further exploration in the context of current debates concerning Scottish independence. Whilst knowledge brokers were positively referred to by policymakers, all of the public health knowledge translation organisations identified in the research are small-scale and dependent on short-term funding. The data suggest these organisations are aiding public health knowledge translation to the extent that they are supporting inter-personal relationships and can serve as an accessible point of research contact for people in the policy world. However, the research suggested these organisations were hampered by their uncertain future, limited resources and confusion and uncertainty within the public health community about the best approaches to promoting knowledge translation. There were no examples of structural changes to the relationship between public health research and policy emanating from these organisations. Further research might usefully explore: (i) the longer-term trajectories and impacts of organisations with a remit for public health knowledge translation; and (ii) the impacts of the 'research impact' agenda (e.g. by analysing the REF impact case studies, due to be published in 2014). In the PhD interviews (2003-2006), it was notable that researchers involved in tobacco control were far more comfortable with their relationships to the advocacy and third sector community than health inequalities researchers (who struggled to name any relevant advocacy or third sector organisations). In contrast, in the more recent, Post-Doctoral interviews (2011-2012), most health inequalities researchers identified themselves as public health advocates and reflected that this was a recent change. Most researchers and policymakers also identified at least some relevant advocacy organisations, notably The Equality Trust. This suggests there has been a change in how health inequalities researchers view their role and that further research could usefully examine how different actors perceive public health advocacy and its relationship to academic work and to public health knowledge translation. |
| Exploitation Route | The findings suggest researchers working in public health need to do more to engage with the democratic and political aspects of policymaking in the UK. This could involve public health researchers building stronger relationships with third sector and community organisations, politicians and political movements and journalists and making greater use of social media opportunities. Research exploring these different relationships is also required. |
| Sectors | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Education,Healthcare,Government, Democracy and Justice,Other |
| Description | One part of this research, a survey to explore health inequalities researchers' perspectives on potential policy proposals to reduce health inequalities in the UK, has informed an NHS Health Scotland report for the Scottish Government, a briefing by the Centre for Health and the Public Interest (a think tank) and an ASH Scotland policy briefing. This research highlights the strong consensus among health inequalities researchers around the need for upstream, economic, public sector and environmental changes to substantially reduce health inequalities. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2013 |
| Sector | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Other |
| Impact Types | Societal,Policy & public services |
| Description | Money matters : how 'cycles of credit' and resources shape the relationship between research and policy |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Primary Audience | |
| Results and Impact | Invited seminar |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | |
| Description | The politics of ideas : the complex relationship between research and policy in public health |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Primary Audience | |
| Results and Impact | Invited lecture |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | |
| Description | The politics of ideas : the complex relationship between research and policy in public health |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Primary Audience | |
| Results and Impact | Invited seminar |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | |
| Description | The politics of ideas : why it's ideas, not evidence, that influence policy |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Primary Audience | |
| Results and Impact | Invited seminar |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | |
| Description | Transforming ideas : the complex interplay of health inequalities research and policy in the UK |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Primary Audience | |
| Results and Impact | Invited seminar |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | |